FRANCIS VARKEY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition was filed on 26/07/2005, and an interim order was passed on 27/07/2005. It is complained of by the learned counsel for the third respondent, Meenachil Co- operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd., that the direction contained in the order had not been complied with. The direction in the order dated 27/07/2007 is as follows:-

(2.) After hearing both sides, I find that no orders, on merit, need be passed because of the failure to comply with the specific direction contained in the order dated 27/07/2005, as above. However, I dispose of the writ petition, directing the writ petitioner to approach the third respondent, with a representation for an one time settlement scheme, within ten days from today. On receipt of the above representation, the third respondent shall hear the writ petitioner and dispose of the same, on merit, as per the provisions of the one time settlement, contained in Circular No.59/2006, dated 30/11/2006.

(3.) If the order of the third respondent, on the one time settlement representation, is not complied with by the writ petitioner, the third respondent shall be at liberty to proceed against him, as per the law.